N A W A C - Field Study Discussion

[Guest]

Has anyone who has had a sighting of the individual known as "old gray" described it as being similar to the figure in the Melissa Hovey photo?

 

No, the two visual encounters two different members have had with it make it sound more like the PGF subject from behind. Thick all the way down. Old Gray is the only animal we've seen there shaped like that. The body type more typically seen is V-shaped and apparently muscular. Not every sighting allows for that level of detail, though. 

Thank you bipto for the answers...

 

I realized yesterday that I was incorrect. *I* deployed a hair trap consisting of black high test fishing line with six treble hooks attached strung across a path we know them to us at about 6.5" off the ground. Totally spaced it. 

I'm aware that human access to this site is a prime factor here.

 

Absolutely. IMO, there's only two ways that configuration could have been made (rock on nuts on boulder): human or wood ape. I've seen more wood apes in there than outsiders (2 or 3 versus zero) so my money's on wood ape. 

[slabdog]

Great stuff Bipto.

I hope all your peeps in the NAWAC know there are a lot of other peeps out there who are very appreciative of your dedication and efforts.

[slabdog]

Just listened to the entire podcast...

Wow....just wow.

While it's all still circumstantial evidence at this point, simply fascinating.

The core group just strikes me as so credible.

I truly appreciate their style.

GET THAT MONKEY!

[Guest UPs]

You guys are doing a fantastic job not only with the actual work, but also communication with those outside the organization that are interested in the subject.

I can think of only one reason a human would use that rock to crack the nuts is if someone wanted to use them to bait an animal and it was spur of the moment. Not real likely, especially with all the other stuff going on. If you could estimate how long ago they were last used, you could have a better idea of what was going on in that area at the time.

Something else your group could try is making something that an animal the size of bf could use to scratch themselves similar to how bears will rub against a tree. This would also make it easy to collect hair and maybe DNA samples if they actually used it. Do you guys set up nail boards when the cabin is empty for a long period of time? If nothing else, it will keep bears from messing around with the windows and doors.

[slabdog]

I was fascinated by the "wood ape in the trees" hypothesis.

Forget trying to harvest one on the ground....keep your eyes peeled towards the tree tops!

Not much chance of a human in a suit up there!

[Guest]

Has anyone who has had a sighting of the individual known as "old gray" described it as being similar to the figure in the Melissa Hovey photo?

No, the two visual encounters two different members have had with it make it sound more like the PGF subject from behind. Thick all the way down. Old Gray is the only animal we've seen there shaped like that. The body type more typically seen is V-shaped and apparently muscular. Not every sighting allows for that level of detail.

What about the color of old gray? The Melissa hovey photo is the only reference I can think of of a gray wood ape.

[Guest]

Given some responses, the rocks and nuts thing must be more impressive than I realize.

Is this ape behavior? I can understand an ape using a rock to open a nut, but would apes bring nuts to a specific place, a nut breaking sink so to speak? Would these bipedal apes carry bunches in scooped hands, or just bring two or three at a time?

And speaking of apes and food, does NAWAC subscribe to the idea that individual wood apes chase down deer for food, or co-operate as teams to ambush deer?

And speaking of wood apes and NAWAC, if NAWAC is unable to secure a specimen, will it still produce a record of wood ape behavior for science to digest?

[Guest]

Given some responses, the rocks and nuts thing must be more impressive than I realize.

Is this ape behavior? 

 

I posted images of the rock/boulder/nut find along with video of a chimp doing the very same thing on the Bigfoot Show blog. This was linked in the second post in this thread. Here it is again: http://thebigfootshow.com/2013/06/25/aw-nuts/

 

 

I can understand an ape using a rock to open a nut, but would apes bring nuts to a specific place, a nut breaking sink so to speak? 

 

As I've also said, we've found many of these over the years, not just this one. This is the first one we've found in which the assumed pounding stone was still present. They don't bring nuts from miles around to pound them on this specific boulder. 

 

 

Would these bipedal apes carry bunches in scooped hands, or just bring two or three at a time?

 

Until we see one doing it, we can't say.

 

And speaking of apes and food, does NAWAC subscribe to the idea that individual wood apes chase down deer for food, or co-operate as teams to ambush deer?

 

We don't have an organizational POV on that since it's not behavior we've observed, but chimps have been observed using coordinated tactics and we've experienced what we perceive to be some kind of coordinated activity in our presence, so I wouldn't put it past them personally. 

 

And speaking of wood apes and NAWAC, if NAWAC is unable to secure a specimen, will it still produce a record of wood ape behavior for science to digest?

 

We will be working in X collecting observational data about wood apes for as long as we're able to. 

Here's a wider view of the boulder as we found it. The person's identity has been obscured since I don't have permission to post images of them for pubic consumption.

 

Edited June 29, 2013 by bipto

[dmaker]

This exchange brings up something that I have always been curious about. This claim that Bigfoot chases down and preys upon large mammals like deer. Is there evidence of large apes doing this in the wild? I had always thought that apes, while omnivorous, mostly stuck to a vegetarian diet. And that their preying upon animals was restricted to smaller species like when chimps prey upon Colobus monkeys. 

 

It seems to me that the effort required to actually chase down (solo) something like a deer for a bipedal animal would be enormous. And that the success rate for that type of predation would likely be fairly low. The calories necessary to accomplish this task would seem to exact a fairly high toll on the animal. But when questioned with what a Bigfoot would eat in the winter in harsher climates the answer is almost always, deer. But I'm not convinced that a solitary Bigfoot would really even attempt to chase down a deer on foot. I understand that they are big and strong and everything, but chasing down a deer cannot be a simple feat for a bipedal animal regardless of it's size or strength. Especially in snow. 

Edited June 29, 2013 by dmaker

[Guest alaskaloner]

Miles. I don't know exactly, but I'd say less than ten. Keep in mind, one mile of Ouachita jungle is worth five miles of PNW forest if you're ******* it cross-country. This is obviously a place people can get to (because I did) but I only got there after pushing though much brush and crossing water several times. It isn't the kind of place someone would find themselves after a casual hike. 

 

 

Occasionally you make a statement that can be checked even when being evasive about where area X is.   Anyone with google earth can easily check all portions of the Oachita National Forest to see that there isn't any place in the entire forest that is "Miles" from a road.  The ruler function in google earth is great for that.

 

But for those wanting to see the Area X vicinity directly then check out the triangle formed by County Road 256/NF6025 in the Lynn Mountain stretch, to its intersection with NF 6025A.   If you're clever enough to follow the personalities involved and know how to access the county property records database then you can find the cabin site.

 

But in terms of the area around there, you can see there is no place more than a mile from either of those roads.  It is the Cucumber Creek drainage. 

 

If you want to see how scientists have surveyed animals of interest in that exact vicinity, check out this article in the Proceedings of the Oklahoma Academy of Science:

 

http://digital.library.okstate.edu/oas/oas_htm_files/v76/p43_47nf.html

 

The article is entitled "The Herpetofauna and Ichthyofauna of the Cucumber Creek Watershed in the Ouachita Mountains, LeFlore County, Oklahoma".   These scientists spent 430 person-hours and 238 trap-hours there,  capturing and documenting nineteen reptilian species, sixteen amphibian, and thirteen fish species.   This area is actually a bird preserve, and extensive studies of the birds habitating there can also been investigated as well.   Countless hours of field studies have been done on all animals there, including deer, game birds, bear, etc. 

 

Jeff Ford is the wildlife biologist in this Wildlife Management Area, or at least he was through 2012 when I last looked into this.   His telephone number is (918)653-2012.   Anyone could call him or his replacement up and chat about his extensive knowledge of the wildlife in this area and all the studies he is familiar with spanning thousands of hours of field research by various professionals.   One of the odd things about these bigfoot projects is the studious avoidance of paid professionals who spend vastly more time studying the area and indeed managing the wildlife there. 

 

Perhaps Bipto could contradict that though and speak to which of the wildlife managers, scientists, and organizations he is working with there.  That's what scientists do, after all - they collaborate.  Nature Conservancy is involved in that bird preserve for example and there are various other groups concerning themselves with the area.  There's a guy who had a very interesting blog too that was out single-handedly clearing some of the trails coming over from the Beech Creek Unit.  But I am too lazy to go look him up right now. 

 

Cheers. 

Edited June 30, 2013 by alaskaloner

[dmaker]

^^ Very interesting. How could those professionals have missed a breeding population of 800lb primates? Seems incredulous..

[dmaker]

What is even more interesting is that the above mentioned survey dealt with reptiles, amphibians and fish. Most people believe Bigfoot to be riparian, so one would think that a study that included reptiles, amphibians and fish would have put them directly in Bigfoot's wheelhouse so to speak..

[dmaker]

Perhaps Bipto could apply to this group for funding: http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/regions/northamerica/unitedstates/oklahoma/index.htm

 

 

They funded the above mentioned survey after all.  One would think that interest in megafauna like a Wood Ape would attract much attention. 

Edited June 30, 2013 by dmaker

[Guest]

alaskaloner has made similar statements about the location of our research area before on other message boards (at least I assume they're similar — he's been kind of obsessed with us for a while). I really can't say that he's right or he wrong. This isn't *just* because I need to be cagy. There's nothing I can say in response to a direct assertion as to X's location that won't either make some people think I'm lying or, if he happens to be right, violate my commitment to the propert owners that I'd not divulge its location. Each of you is free to interpret my words however you'd like. 

 

That said, I can tell you I have not been dishonest in any way when I said:

 

Miles. I don't know exactly, but I'd say less than ten. Keep in mind, one mile of Ouachita jungle is worth five miles of PNW forest if you're ******* it cross-country. This is obviously a place people can get to (because I did) but I only got there after pushing though much brush and crossing water several times. It isn't the kind of place someone would find themselves after a casual hike.

 

I know the place and I know the distances within a few miles. What I said is absolutely truthful. Regardless as to whether or not alaskaloner is correct with regards to where he thinks the location is, anyone of us who has spent time in the back woods of this country know that there are roads where the map says there aren't and there aren't roads where the map says there are. In fact, my GPS says there is a road not far from the cabins in which we operate that simply isn't there anymore. It's gone. Same goes for trails that maps say are in the area. I've hiked them. They're gone, too. All that's left is a place where the bushes and trees are a little shorter than the area around them. If you want it to be a trail because a map says it's one, fine, but it really won't be one unless you're willing to clear it. 

 

Everything I have said publically about what's happened to me and those in my organization in X has been, to the best of my knowledge, true. I have been as straightforward as I can be. When I haven't been, it's been to assure the safety of my friends and others. I have not maliciously deceived anyone. You can believe me or not. Your choice. I have a reputation in this community and I have put it all on the line. Every bit of it. Why? To share some of the incredible things that have happened to us and what we've learned. To do what the NAWAC mission statement commits us to do.

 

Bottom line is we're trying to prove this animal exists and people like alaskaloner are trying to make that hard if not impossible. If it's not real as he asserts, then why bother? Why not let us have our delusional fun? The kind of passion and overt hatred this individual exhibits towards us in his usual haunts is borderline pathological. Some people react violently when we share what we've experienced. The closer we seem to get to shedding real light on this subject, the more aggressive they become. I can't explain why.

 

^^ Very interesting. How could those professionals have missed a breeding population of 800lb primates? Seems incredulous..

 

Not any more incredulous than the fact that they've missed them everywhere else on the continent, too. 

[Guest]

One would think that interest in megafauna like a Wood Ape would attract much attention. 

 

Based on our experience with established environmental, scientific, and governmental organizations, nothing could be further from the truth.